Ask MetaFilter questions tagged with globalwarming

The polluter pays

Tawita — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 05:23:02 -0800

I (think I) read somewhere on the web the factoid that, if we could restrict the impacts of climate change to within the borders of the country responsible for the greenhouse gas emissions, the temperature of the USA would rise by (something like) 22° Celsius. Now I can't for the life of me find it again. Does anyone know where I read this, or am I simply imagining things? I'd like to be able to cite an authority for my assertion. Climate change skeptics need not apply.

Where do all these anti-AGW comments come from?

eagle-bear — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 15:25:16 -0800

Whenever there's a prominent article about climate change published online, without fail, a multititude of global warming sceptics then swarm discussion board and fill it with angry comments. Where does this come from? I find this phenomenon pretty inexplicable. I have thought about the following possibilities: (a) maybe people are paid to post to these discussions; (b) perhaps I have seriously underestimated the number of AGW sceptics that are actually out there; and (c) perhaps this issue just motivates the hell out of certain people to devote a lot of time to this. Anyone have any answers or ideas?

Help me calculate my carbon ass-print.

dr. boludo — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:46:46 -0800

How much does my flatulence contribute to climate change? I'm a pretty typical granola liberal -- I commute by bicycle almost all the time, and I eat a lot of legumes. Consequently, I fart a lot. I recently joked that probably the biggest part of my carbon footprint is actually my butt. This, of course, got me thinking: Could it really be? I understand that methane is orders of magnitude more significant than CO2 in contributing to global warming.

Given this data: male, early 30s, 175 lbs, I'd estimate an average of 30 very healthy sized farts per day (I have neither the equipment nor the inclination to obtain a more precise volumetric measurement, sorry)...

What is the estimated environmental impact of my ass as compared to other typical activities? How many commuting miles (city driving, 1998 Toyota Corolla) would I need to replace with bicycling or walking miles to make my digestive tract carbon neutral?

Come on AskMe, I know you like overthinking plates of beans!

Too Hot Not To Handle

Ash3000 — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 10:39:33 -0800

A friend, who leans Ron Paul libertarian, was recently trying to convince me that anthropogenic global warming is largely a myth. A central part of his argument was his claiming that there was recently a petition signed by 40,000 independent climate scientists saying that, in his words, "so-called global warming is bullshit." More inside. I'm no climate scientist, but I feel like I have a fairly good layman's grasp on the basics of climate change, and have heard of a few such "petitions" that generally end up being filled with non-scientists, or those on the fringe, or those who are corporate-sponsored - but I'd never heard of this petition.

I asked him to cite what exactly he was referring to, and he said he couldn't remember the sourcing at the moment (it was a loud bar night), but rest assured that the whole idea of a consensus about climate change is part of the push for one-world government.

The one-world-paranoia aside, does anyone know what he might have been referring to? I couldn't find anything googling for the number 40,000, but 30,000 yielded this. Might that be it?

I think he absorbs a fair amount of fringe-right media - can anyone give me the straight dope on the sort of things that are being circulated as "proof against climate change" that this may have been a part of, and what the common refutations are against this specific petition (if you know it), or such petitions generally? Or just a way to use this as an excuse to learn more? I'd like to continue these conversations with him, but I feel like he keeps on citing research that he reads in newsletters and the like.

(Also, while I'm here, he claimed that carbon taxation, especially in its current legislative form in Congress, is a secret tool to constrict all industry, and that Al Gore is just trying to profiteer for his private business. What're the arguments against these specific claims?)

Website to sort and display different mountain heights?

seasparrow — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 05:56:36 -0800

Is there a website that would show the world sorted by elevation? I recently enjoyed reading Plague Year, a post-apocalyptic thriller. The main conceit of this science-fiction novel is that a nanotechnology plague that kills any warm blooded animal (including humans), but the disease self-destructs at altitudes above 10,000 feet. How much territory would this be across the whole planet? I liked the book. It isn't great literature, but the author, Jeff Carlson, thinks through the ramifications of a world where most mammals are now extinct and a tiny fragment of humanity clings to a few frozen mountain-tops. Carlson also doesn't shy away or sugar-coat the realities of such a situation. He also doesn't make it easy for his characters, unlike other authors in the post-apocalyptic genre. (Yes, I'm pointing at you, S.M. Stirling.) Some of the protagonists feel guilty about the cannibalism they had to resort to in order to survive, but at least they are alive, unlike 99.9% of the human race.

So, like I said, a fun read that got me thinking. My real question for the Hive Mind is-- in all the great variety of the internet, is there some sort of geographical website that would allow me to view the world through the filter of all elevations above 10,000 feet?

Which sparks another question: Have you seen the maps that occasionally appear showing what the world would look like if global warming caused the sea levels to rise 50 or 100 feet? Is there a website that will let you do that as well? Maybe even set your own parameters on how much you want the water levels to rise or fall, and then generate a map for you?

Does anyone work in the field? Isn't is called Geographical Information Systems? It sounds fascinating. I think I might enjoy working a GIS job eventually. Questions like these linger in my mind, so much so that I'm willing to spend my one-a-week currency of an AskMe question to see what the sophisticated and cosmopolitcal Mefite community has to say about it.

Thanks for your help, and I hope I'm not the only weirdo who thinks about these things!

What are some global warming tipping points?

jefficator — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 06:32:46 -0800

What are some smaller-scale global warming tipping points that would radically alter everyday life? Last night on NPR's marketplace, a special report from Helena, Montana, described the devastation wrought by the pine beetle in the Ponderosa forests of the West. According to the report, a two-degree increase in average temperatures has prevented the hard freezes that kill the pine beetle. As a result, those pests are now rampant and destroying whole forests.

(The report did acknowledge the dissenting opinion that fire suppression and poor forest management are the culprits, but my question still stands.)

We here a lot about generic ice-cap melting, etc. But I'm imagining, for instance, that perhaps the temperature increase might prevent freezes that control mosquito populations in the South? Etc?

Can anyone identify other small catastrophes waiting to happen as temperatures inch up? Especially ones specific to your region that others might not know about?

Offsetting sea level rise: An engineering idea of Biblical proportions

0bvious — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 04:52:25 -0800

The seas are rising. Climate change has made it inevitable. I have a strange question... Assuming that world sea-level rises by 1 metre over the next hundred years - Would it be possible to cordon off a section of land, somewhere in the centre of a continent, and flood it to create an artificial ocean, thus reducing the consequences of the sea rise? This Biblical scale engineering feat must take these issues into account:

1. The section of land would have to be a very large 'bowl', in the centre of a continent, that is already below sea level. Another section of land, leading from the ocean to this central 'bowl' section, would have to be carved out to create the biggest dam system mankind has ever witnessed. Does somewhere like this exist?

2. The number of humans currently living in this 'bowl' would have to be less than the number of humans who would be displaced by the 1 metre sea level rise. Otherwise this huge engineering feat would not be worth undertaking.

3. Other environmental issues should be taken into account, such as the ecosystems that would be displaced or the new weather patterns and ocean currents that would be created.

Do you have the calculations of water/land displaced? Or ideas about where this kind of thing could be built? I'd love any input on this monstrous thought experiment.

Thanks!

How has droughts in Australia (Brisbane, Melbourne) impacted perceptions of climate change?

GIMG — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 15:00:43 -0800

How have landscapes transformed by drought in Australia (esp. Brisbane or Melbourne) impacted people's perceptions of climate change? I'm traveling through Brisbane and Melbourne at the moment, researching how the consequences of drought have transformed the landscape (e.g. rainwater tanks, water conservation signs, desiccating lawns and parks, disappearing ponds, lowering dams, shifts toward native Australian plants for gardening, waterless fountains, brown sporting fields, etc.), and the subsequent cognitive processing of climate change. Even with the recent flooding, is this a connection Australians make? Have landscapes been transformed in other ways? And who might provide relevant insights into this question?

A Burning Question

greekphilosophy — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:39:00 -0800

I need a good collection of readings identifying major issues associated with energy production using biomass. Topic: Biomass use in energy production.
Goal: The formulation of an official policy concerning biomass energy for an environmental group.

You're an environmentalist and you have strong feelings about biomass, you want us to read [fill in the blank]. You are a developer or a corn farmer or an urban planner, and you want us to read [fill in the blank]. You are an indigenous person, and if the military junta in charge of your country allowed you access to literacy education, you would want us to read [fill in the blank].

Introductory readings are not necessary - this is for a crowd that is highly educated in environmental issues and already understands the basics of biomass. What we need are readings representing a variety of stakeholder interests. All publications are fair game - blogs, podcasts, articles, books, chapters, trade journals, haiku, medieval manuscripts. Extra points for anything having to do with urban waste management.

Social Media + Environmental Concerns?

GIMG — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 11:43:04 -0800

What are some social media sites that have an environmental tilt? I'm looking at both general social media sites that have sections with an environmental tilt (e.g. Facebook groups against climate change), but also social media sites specifically tailored toward environmental purposes (e.g. stepgreen.org).

Fifteen years ago I heard that we had ten years to turn the world around or it would be too late. When can I stop caring about the Environment?

Sully — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:37:04 -0800

In high school, I remember a teacher who taped some news show and showed it to us in class and it said that we had like, ten years to turn the planet around or global warming and our First World lifestyle where ten percent of the planet caused fifty percent of the emissions or something would push us past the point of no return. Anyway, my question is, have we passed it yet? When can I stop caring about the Environment? Is the planet finally, mercifully irretrievable?

It seems like every five years I see something on the news where it says we have only ten years left. How is this different than a doomsday cult that keeps revising when the End of the World is when the day comes and they are still there?

I am ready to stop recycling and re-using and reducing. I want to stop resenting The Environment for making me feel guilty when I live like a First Worlder, when some paper makes it into the trash, when I order in a Thai combo in its styrofoam container, when I throw away a computer monitor.

When can I say, "It's too late for us. Global Warming is a reality and it's here and there's nothing we can do to stop it... What a relief." And live my life, without having to be conscious about the choices I make with respect to how it impacts the Environment?

I know this is not politically correct.

What effect does respiration have on global C02 levels?

zeoslap — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 06:08:55 -0800

What effect does respiration have on global C02 levels? Since 1900 we've added 4 billion people to the planet, what effect does all those people breathing have on C02 levels (i.e is it significant?)

What innovations of the Obama campaign could be applied to activist campaigns?

GIMG — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 12:49:30 -0800

Could activists for social causes (e.g. global warming) learn something from the Obama campaign in how to effectively engage and mobilize people?

I need to cite my Gulf Stream sources!

teraspawn — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 13:25:05 -0800

I'm arguing with a conservative friend about global warming. Specifically, the idea that changes in the Gulf Stream have lead to Britain getting colder as a result of climate change. I don't know how valid this theory still is, but my question is: where can I find some scientific journal articles on the subject?

Were China's Olympic greening efforts short-term?

GIMG — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 11:17:13 -0800

Will China's efforts to go green for the Olympics be instituted for the longer-term or for a broader geographic range?

How does the Chinese media deal with climate change (esp. during the Olympics)?

GIMG — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 06:51:20 -0800

How does the Chinese media handle climate change, and what (if any) difference did the Beijing Olympics have in this? I only really followed the Chinese media in the time window surrounding the Beijing Olympics - I'm trying to get a sense for how climate change is discussed in the Chinese media (what is to be emphasized, what is to be ignored or downplayed), and how the Olympics impacted these discussions.

I've noticed a lot of contrasting opinions - a stream of climate change skeptic editorials, we must act now to stop climate change, features on industries who are trying to cut emissions - a contrast that I think goes against Western perception of a homogeneous Chinese media. What are the main pressures on discussion of climate change in the press?

What's the evangelical New York Times?

lilac girl — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 07:12:44 -0800

What are some popular evangelical periodicals in the U.S. about current events? Bonus points if they have an online archive; super-extra bonus points if the archive goes back before 2006. I'm looking for newspapers, magazines, newsletters, journals, etc. that report news aimed at an evangelical Christian audience for a paper about whether their press coverage of global warming has changed in the past few years. I don't need magazines about theology, missionary work,etc. I've looked at the Evangelical Press Association but I'm a bit overwhelmed by their lists. I'm having trouble identifying popular periodicals, and many of the ones I do seem to find don't have archives of their articles before 2006. Regional periodicals are fine (but I'd prefer U.S. publications) and I don't care how often new issues come out.

How can I travel between continents without emitting much CO2?

sindark — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:55:48 -0800

I want to travel, but I think doing so by airplane is unethical because of the associated carbon emissions and the inadequacy of 'offset' schemes. Is it still possible to travel by sea from North America to Europe or Asia? If so, how long does it take, and what are the associated costs?

Where to find a chart breaking out components of possible CO2 reduction?

teracloth — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 12:41:54 -0800

How big a part of the global warming solution might come from land-use changes, how much from no-till farming and so forth? I know I've seen charts like this several times in the past, but now I somehow can't turn one up.

So we're trying to cut greenhouse emissions 30 percent by 2030 or whatever. How much of that cut can we reasonably expect to come from transporting less stuff, how much from greener building, etc.?

Ideally I'd like to find a graphical illustration, but words would do. I'm hoping to convince someone of the diversity and difficulty of tactics that it'll take to save the world.

NASCAR and Earth

yoga — Thu, 08 May 2008 04:50:53 -0800

Why are "NASCAR", "peak oil", "global warming" and "gas prices" never mentioned in the same sentence? Are there statistics on how much gas / oil / petroleum products that are used for a typical race? What about practice races?

Climate scientists as political activists?

pica — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 04:19:45 -0800

How are the role of scientists and the relationship between them and society changing as the climate questions has become (and will continue to become) more and more acute? For example, I suppose that there for many climate scientist could be a tension between on the one hand scientific standards of never saying anything that’s not entirely certain and ‘keeping out of politics’, and on the other hand the need to create a quick change of public policies. Where do I find anything especially clever written on this? And how is the moral/political responsibilities of scientists changing in general in the light of climate change? I’m particularly interested in what scientists and scientific institutions themselves actually think and do here and how this has been received by politicians, activists and the public.

Lot’s of questions in this question, I see that. It’s part of the early creative process of writing an application for a research project. That means, if you have any ideas about questions in the neighbouring areas that you find being of particular interest from both a political science perspective and a save-the-world-perspective, they’re also very welcome!

Which scientific journals to search for global warming naysayers?

damnthesehumanhands — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:59:52 -0800

I'm researching scientists who dispute / are skeptics of man-made climate change (a la the UN IPCC's findings.) Which peer reviewed, scholarly science journals should I be searching through?

Best Global Warming Real Estate?

53B3L1U5 — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:07:20 -0800

In the inevitability of global warming (bias disclosed) where should I move to? I'm a 20-something getting close to that home-owner stage, but from some of the stuff I'm reading a lot of great places to live won't be great much longer! With the drying of the west, the sunbelt is looking less enticing. I live near the ocean now, but it seems the dream of staying nearby is fading. [Blast from the past] I figure to be alive into the last half of this century. With the world getting warmer where are the cool places gonna be in 50 years?

If you believe in climate change, is it wrong to drive or fly?

MetaMonkey — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 06:47:10 -0800

If you believe climate change is real, bad, and man-made: does that mean it's wrong to take a flight or drive a car? Are there any reasonable excuses?

Unilateral Presidential power for low-carbon initiatives?

dondiego87 — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 06:40:23 -0800

A question about Presidential power -- specifically, for the implementation of carbon reduction initiatives including a cap-and-trade system. Yesterday, I watched the Presidential Forum on Global Warming and America's Energy Future. Sens. Clinton and Edwards both said that they would create a cap-and-trade system to limit emissions of carbon dioxide, among with many other measures regarding America's energy use.

However, what I didn't hear for most of the measures (including the trading schemes) was an explanation of how the candidate, as President, would implement his or her ideas. So I ask you, hive mind. How would this work? Suggesting legislation for Congress to consider seems like a pretty weak tack. Are the candidates planning to implement their plans unilaterally through Executive Order?

(A little history: A cap-and-trade system for sulfur dioxide was established during the first Bush administration, with the White House pushing amendments to the Clean Air Act and Congress adopting those amendments. The mores of the legislature may be different now with regards to carbon dioxide than they were then for sulfur dioxide.)

Please, only productive replies. Thanks!